Palau P, Núñez J, Sanchis J, Husser O, Bodí V, Núñez E, Miñana G, Boesen L, Ventura S, Llàcer A. Differential prognostic effect of revascularization according to a simple comorbidity index in high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.
Clin Cardiol 2011;
35:237-43. [PMID:
22083556 DOI:
10.1002/clc.20996]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2011] [Accepted: 09/16/2011] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Data on the effect of revascularization on outcome in patients with high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) and significant comorbidities are scarce. Recently, a simple comorbidity index (SCI) including 5 comorbidities (renal failure, dementia, peripheral artery disease, heart failure, and prior myocardial infarction [MI]) has shown to be a useful tool for risk stratification. Nevertheless, therapeutic implications have not been derived.
HYPOTHESIS
We sought to evaluate the prognostic effect attributable to revascularization in NSTEACS according the SCI score.
METHODS
We included 1017 consecutive patients with NSTEACS. The effect of revascularization on a combined end point of all-cause mortality or nonfatal MI was evaluated by Cox regression according to SCI categories.
RESULTS
A total of 560 (55.1%), 236 (23.2%), and 221 (21.7%) patients showed 0, 1, and ≥2 points according to the SCI, respectively. Coronary angiography was performed in 725 patients (71.5%), and 450 patients (44.3%) underwent revascularization. During a median follow-up of 16 months (interquartile range, 12-36 months), 305 (30%) patients experienced the combined end point (202 deaths [19.9%] and 170 MIs [16.7%]). In multivariate analysis, a differential prognostic effect of revascularization was observed comparing SCI ≥2 vs 0 (P for interaction = 0.008). Thus, revascularization was associated with a greater prognostic benefit in patients with SCI ≥2 (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29-0.89), P = 0.018), whereas no significant benefit was observed in those with 0 and 1 point (HR: 1.31, 95% CI: 0.88-1.94, P = 0.171 and HR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.70-1.76, P = 0.651, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
In NSTEACS, the SCI score appears to be a useful tool for identifying a subset of patients with a significant long-term death/MI risk reduction attributable to revascularization.
Collapse